” OVER the past two decades, the majority of Americans in a country deeply divided over gun control have coalesced behind a single proposition: The sale of assault weapons should be banned.

That idea was one of the pillars of the Obama administration’s plan to curb gun violence, and it remains popular with the public. In a polllast December, 59 percent of likely voters said they favor a ban.

But in the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.

It turns out that big, scary military rifles don’t kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.

In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.

The continuing focus on assault weapons stems from the media’s obsessive focus on mass shootings, which disproportionately involve weapons like the AR-15, a civilian version of the military M16 rifle. This, in turn, obscures some grim truths about who is really dying from gunshots.

Annually, 5,000 to 6,000 black men are murdered with guns. Black men amount to only 6 percent of the population. Yet of the 30 Americans on average shot to death each day, half are black males.

Democrats decided to push for a ban of what seemed like the most dangerous guns in America: assault weapons, which were presented by the media as the gun of choice for drug dealers and criminals, and which many in law enforcement wanted to get off the streets.

This politically defined category of guns — a selection of rifles, shotguns and handguns with “military-style” features — only figured in about 2 percent of gun crimes nationwide before the ban.

Banning sales of military-style weapons resonated with both legislators and the public: Civilians did not need to own guns designed for use in war zones.

On Sept. 13, 1994, President Bill Clinton signed an assault weapons ban into law. It barred the manufacture and sale of new guns with military features and magazines holding more than 10 rounds. But the law allowed those who already owned these guns — an estimated 1.5 million of them — to keep their weapons.

The policy proved costly. Mr. Clinton blamed the ban for Democratic losses in 1994. Crime fell, but when the ban expired, a detailed study found no proof that it had contributed to the decline.

The ban did reduce the number of assault weapons recovered by local police, to 1 percent from roughly 2 percent.

“ Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement,” a Department of Justice-funded evaluation concluded.

Still, the majority of Americans continued to support a ban on assault weapons.

One reason: The use of these weapons may be rare over all, but they’re used frequently in the gun violence that gets the most media coverage, mass shootings.

The criminologist James Alan Fox at Northeastern University estimates that there have been an average of 100 victims killed each year in mass shootings over the past three decades. That’s less than 1 percent of gun homicide victims.

But these acts of violence in schools and movie theaters have come to define the problem of gun violence in America.

Most Americans do not know that gun homicides have decreased by 49 percent since 1993 as violent crime also fell, though rates of gun homicide in the United States are still much higher than those in other developed nations. A Pew survey conducted after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., found that 56 percent of Americans believed wrongly that the rate of gun crime was higher than it was 20 years ago.”

While the Times shows quite clearly the depth of the public’s erroneous beliefs regarding the nature of the demonized “assault weapons” , nowhere does it acknowledge it’s and it’s fellow MSM compatriot’s responsibility in creating that public misconception in the first place .Read the whole thing

” Beretta U.S.A. Corp., located in Accokeek, Maryland, announced today that it has decided to move its manufacturing capabilities from its existing location to a new production facility that it is building in Gallatin, Tennessee. The Gallatin facility is scheduled to be opened in mid-2015. Beretta U.S.A. had previously planned to use the new Gallatin, Tennessee facility for new machinery and production of new products only.

“ During the legislative session in Maryland that resulted in passage of the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, the version of the statute that passed the Maryland Senate would have prohibited Beretta U.S.A. from being able to manufacture, store or even import into the State products that we sell to customers throughout the United States and around the world. While we were able in the Maryland House of Delegates to reverse some of those obstructive provisions, the possibility that such restrictions might be reinstated in the future leaves us very worried about the wisdom of maintaining a firearm manufacturing factory in the State,” stated Jeff Cooper, General Manager for Beretta U.S.A. Corp.

“ While we had originally planned to use the Tennessee facility for new equipment and for production of new product lines only, we have decided that it is more prudent from the point of view of our future welfare to move the Maryland production lines in their entirety to the new Tennessee facility,” Cooper added. “

” The Italian company had disclosed a $45 million plan this year to expand operations to a new factory near Nashville. But Beretta has decided to go beyond that plan because, a senior executive said, the company is “very worried about the wisdom of maintaining a firearm manufacturing factory” in Maryland.

Maryland’s new gun restrictions, pushed by Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Conn., bans 45 types of assault rifles and put in place tough fingerprint, photo identification and training requirements. Magazines are limited to 10 rounds.

A version of the legislation that passed the state Senate “would have prohibited Beretta ­USA from being able to manufacture, store or even import into the State products that we sell to customers throughout the United States and around the world,” the company said.

Jeff Reh, a spokesman for Beretta USA, said in an interview that executives had become increasingly worried that future legislative sessions could end more “disastrously” for the company. “We wanted to control our own destiny,” he said. “

It never ceases to amaze us that the politicians always seem to believe that they operate in a vacuum , that there is no alternative save to do as they command , even while the market continues to demonstrate endlessly that foolish , naive , “feel good” legislation comes with a price tag … that of lost jobs , lost revenue and lost taxes . Good for Tennessee , good for Beretta …

” New York’s new gun-control law, the so-called SAFE Act, largely survived its first federal-court challenge on this past Tuesday. The more than 1,140 New Yorkers it’s made felons will remain so. But even the testimony of the state’s own expert witness failed to show that the law will cut crime.

The decision relied heavily on testimony by George Mason University criminology professor Chris Koper, who argued “that the criminal use of assault weapons declined after the federal assault-weapons ban was enacted in 1994, independently of trends in gun crime.” Judge Skretny wrote in his opinion: “Because New York’s regulations are tighter than those in the federal ban, [Koper] believes, quite reasonably, that the affect [sic] will be greater.”

” Gun control advocates won a major victory Tuesday, but the fight over New York’s SAFE Act is far from over.

An appeal of Chief U.S. District Judge William M. Skretny’s decision upholding most of the new law is all but guaranteed.

And that appeal may come from supporters of the law, as well.

“ I think there’s going to be appeals on both sides,” said Brian T. Stapleton, a lawyer for the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, one of the groups fighting the law.

Stapleton’s prediction is based on Skretny’s decision to uphold two key elements of the law, the state’s ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and his rejection of a third component, the seven-round limit for magazines.

The judge called the seven-round limit “tenuous, strained and unsupported.” “

” “People know that registration leads to confiscation,” said Jacob Rieper, a spokesman for the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, referring to the portion of the law that requires anyone possessing a military-style assault rifle on Jan. 15 register it by April 15.

Failure to do so is a misdemeanor. But Rieper and other gun-rights advocates predict many owners will run the risk, which may not be much of a gamble if their belief that local police, sheriffs and the state police will not go out of their way to aggressively enforce the law holds true.

“ The rank-and-file troopers don’t want anything to do with it,” state Assemblyman Bill Nojay, a Republican from suburban Rochester, said on Monday. “I don’t know of a single sheriff upstate who is going to enforce it.

“ If you don’t have the troopers and you don’t have the sheriffs, who have you got? You’ve got (Gov.) Andrew Cuomo pounding on the table in Albany,” Nojay said.”

Do Not Comply …

“If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so.”

” Opposition to New York’s extreme gun control law the Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act continues and elected officials are stepping forward to promote full repeal of the bill that was hastily, strong-armed into law.

“The Republican majority made this happen,” said Rep. David J. DiPietro (R.-East Aurora), a freshmen state assemblyman representing parts of Erie and Wyoming County in western New York.

Dean G. Skelos (R.-Rockville Centre) who is the majority leader of the New York State Senate is to blame, he said. “He voted for the bill. He allowed the bill to come to the floor.”

The former Village of Aurora trustee and mayor said that Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo brokered a deal with Skelos to enact the SAFE Act. “They threatened Long Island Republicans that if they did not vote for the bill, $1 million would be donated to an opponent for their seat.”

“Skelos and his Long Island delegation sold us out,” he said.

An overwhelming majority of Democrats in the state’s assembly will not pass a repeal bill, and the governor will not sign it, she said. “Our hope is in the lawsuits pending and the courts determining the law unconstitutional.” “

Long Island “Republicans” are nothing of the sort . They are all John McCain style republicans which is to say , no republican at all .

” As I’m sure most of you know, yesterday Illinois state House passed a bill that, when/if signed into law, will give residents of the state a mechanism for concealed carry. Illinois was previously the only state in the US without some kind of concealed carry program.

The new bill has further reaching implications though. One of the aspects of the amended version of the bill is that the state will get preemption on gun laws. This would mean that cities, towns and counties would not be able to enact their own gun legislation. This means in cities like Chicago, the strict “assault weapons” ban in place there will be effectively repealed.”

(1) The most important vote was the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer national gun registry proposal. With 60 votes needed for passage, the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer amendment was shot down by a vote of 54-46.

GOA and NRA strongly opposed the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer amendment. But we were surprised to see that another gun group – not only said they supported the Toomey language, but – said they helped write the Toomey-Manchin-Schumer text. Thankfully, their support for this gun control language was not enough to get it passed.

(2) The Cornyn-Vitter-Thune amendment – pushed hard by Gun Owners of America – received a 57-43 vote (so we fell three votes short since 60 were needed). This provision would have allowed concealed carry holders and persons in constitutional carry states to carry nationwide. The overwhelming vote on this amendment sets the stage for bringing it up again and again on must-pass legislation.

(3) As predicted, the Feinstein gun ban lost by a vote of 40-60 – falling far short of a majority – and the magazine ban lost by a vote of 46-54.

Today is a day to celebrate! We thank God for all of you and for all the Help that we have received in this long struggle to stop infringements of our liberties.”

American culture is buzzing with heated debates on the Second Amendment, gun control, and the rights of individual citizens to use firearms to defend themselves. In the wake of the mass shooting in Newtown, CT, the administration is proposing draconian new gun laws that would almost certainly eventuate in the loss of all privately owned firearms. As Christian citizens hear those debates, and participate in them, it ought to be our priority to follow the principles of Scripture, rather than the opinions of man. This article from pastor Gordan Runyan and the Happy Siege publishing club is meant to arm you with the principles of the Word of God. If your right to defend yourself and your family is a right that comes from God, then no man and no government has the right to take that from you. What does the Bible say? “

This review is from: The Biblical Case for Private Gun Ownership (Kindle Edition)

I am a gun owner and am concerned about the attack being made on the Second Amendment, but I did not find this book illuminating. I found this to be long on the author’s opinion, but short on readings from the Bible.

This review is from: The Biblical Case for Private Gun Ownership (Kindle Edition)

I have enjoyed many of Gordan’s writings over the years and have had the distinct pleasure to speak with him and publish some of his writings on my site. Gordan has a easy to read style and a gift from God in communicating the heart of the topics he covers. This one is no exception. Without being exhaustive, this article will simply give you a foundation to begin a more thorough study of the principles of Holy Writ regarding self-defense, defense of others, and checking Government tyranny by means of arms. If you are a pacifist, be warned: You will be challenged! For an even greater dealing of the subject, I highly recommend Runyan’s book: Resistance To Tyrants, which is much more exhaustive and even deals with arguments against his position.

This review is from: The Biblical Case for Private Gun Ownership (Kindle Edition)

In today’s atmosphere – questions about gun ownership answered by a scripturally knowledgeable Christian are a MUST!

Does the Bible say anything about guns? Of course not – but it sure says a lot about weapons! I was surprised to learn how swords (sword control) were taken from the people of God – leaving them defenseless! (Yes, he gives the scripture reference).

As Christians, we want to obey the whole counsel of God and it is refreshing to find Biblical answers to our questions.

Would God have us just idly stand by and watch a neighbor (or God forbid a loved one) be abused by an evil person? Doesn’t the scripture “Love your neighbor as yourself” mean we should protect our neighbor from injury?

The issue of importance is: What does the Bible say? The author does a fantastic job of giving the reader clear principles in this article.

You’ll not regret any article you purchase from Gordan Runyan. They are scripturally sound and his sense of humor is an added bonus.

This review is from: The Biblical Case for Private Gun Ownership (Kindle Edition)

Unfortunately for the church in the U.S. most pastors are pantywaists who fear man more than God. They are more interested in protecting their careers and positions than protecting and warning their flocks. Gordon Runyan is not numbered among these lapdogs of civil government. His short pamphlet is long on sound Biblical arguments for the right of self defense enshrined in the Second Amendment. It is essential reading for understanding the Biblical basis for defending one self not only against street thugs in gang attire but also government thugs in business attire.

” In the poll of 15,000 law enforcement professionals, 71% of respondents said an “assault weapons” ban would have zero impact on violent crime. Of those surveyed, 95.7% said the same of a “high capacity” magazine ban, and 79.7% said the same in response to a question on universal background checks.

Over 90% of these law enforcement professionals said “mandatory sentences with no plea bargains” for those who use a gun in perpetrating a crime would reduce violent crime.

When asked if they supported concealed carry laws for citizens without a felony in their past, 91.3% of respondents answered “yes” on “without question and without further restrictions.” “

” 2. The bill requires “universal background checks” for the sale of all firearms immediately, upon passage.

Under current law, private sales of rifles and shotguns are completely unregulated (while the sale of any pistol or revolver or the sale of a rifle or shotgun by a licensed dealer requires a criminal background check). Under the bill, this glaring loophole is immediately closed, and all private long gun sales must be preceded by the buyer passing a national criminal background check.

Immediately upon passage, no pistol, revolver, rifle or shotgun can be sold to any Connecticut resident until the buyer undergoes and passes a national criminal background check — whether such sale is private, at a gun show, or through a dealer.”

” Sens. Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee are threatening to filibuster gun-control legislation, according to a letter they plan to hand-deliver to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s office on Tuesday.

“We will oppose the motion to proceed to any legislation that will serve as a vehicle for any additional gun restrictions,” the three conservatives wrote in a copy of the signed letter obtained by POLITICO.

Though they don’t use the word “filibuster” in the letter, the conservatives are leaving no doubt that they would filibuster on an initial procedural question — the motion to proceed.”

” President Obama gave his weekly address and revisited the Newtown tragedy in an appeal to Congress to pass universal background checks, restrictions on private gun sales, and the assault weapons ban.

Adam Lanza planned his grisly murders for years, and if it weren’t a ‘military-style’ rifle, it would have been something else, like fire or explosives. Are we going to ban fire too? Because in 2009 there were over 58,000 arsons, costing an average of $17,411 each in damage. According to the U.S. Fire Administration, there are an average of 375 deaths each year from arson, which is also more than those killed by all rifles.”

” The battle is on between the NRA and Michael Bloomberg who plans to purchase 12 million dollars worth of advertising to target senators and pressure them to vote for stronger gun control laws. NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre fired back saying Bloomberg, “can’t buy America.”

” How do Connecticut residents feel about the crackdown on the Second Amendment? Well, there are people from both sides making passionate arguments on the issue, however, one gentleman last week was able to make a particularly persuasive case against more gun control and in favor of the U.S. Constitution.

Meet Robert Steed, a resident of Vernon, Conn. who took three days straight off work to attend several gun control hearings in Connecticut. On March 14, Steed was more “aggravated” than usual with lawmakers and he let them know it in his fiery testimony, telling them that they were “coloring outside the lines of constitutional parameters.”

” The reason that your jobs are becoming so difficult is because you’re coloring outside the lines of constitutional parameters,” Steed shot back. “That’s the bottom line. You are trying to marriage up public safety with constitutional rights. The Constitution did not guarantee public safety, it guaranteed liberty. And sometimes what comes with liberty is tragedy, unfortunately.” “

” Well, any conservative could have seen this coming, despite the incessant rambling of anti-gun zealots calling for a ban on so-called assault weapons. The first ban had a de minimis effect on lowering violent crime, and Democrats paid a heavy political price during the ’94 midterms for it. Now, the Washington Post’s Ed O’Keefe reports today that this anti-gun provision is dead on arrival. Furthermore, it’s not included in the official bill, but as an amendment to it.

So, in the Democratic-controlled Senate, Feinstein’s amendment couldn’t even muster forty votes! That means there’s at least sixteen Democratic Senators, who said to the gentlelady from California “no thanks” to her proposal.

This is an interesting takeaway since last January new outlets, like Bloomberg, were touting that America was “ever so falling out of love with guns.” Joshua Green penned the column, and noted that “the course has been set, and the taboo on gun control lifted.” Yeah, Mr. Green – Americans still like their guns, their Second Amendment rights, and for government to leave them alone.

Benjamin M. Wassell, an Iraq War veteran, was charged with twice selling newly banned military-style ‘assault’ weapons and standard-capacity magazines to an undercover police officer as part of a sting operation conducted by State Police and the New York Attorney General’s Office, the Buffalo News reported.

The first sale Wassell made to the undercover officer was made nine days after the Governor rammed through the law in the dead of night after waving the mandatory three-day legislative review period.

Instead of arresting Wassell after his first offense, the investigators held out and remained undercover to see if he would sell another banned firearm. Unfortunately, he did.

Thoughts and analysis

This is only beginning.

Gun owners in the Empire State should be on high-alert moving forward. Both Cuomo and NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg will continue to appropriate state and city resources to conducting sting operations that attempt to entrap law-abiding gun owners.

NY SAFE Act: Question on ‘Assault’ Weapons Registration

The way it looks, lawmakers want to ensure that this law is taken seriously. Previously legal firearms are now banned. And if you fail to register them in the coming weeks, you’re now a criminal in the eyes of the state.

Also, please note that these laws do not only apply to firearms, but magazines as well. The NY SAFE Act put a retroactive ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. If you’re caught with a 10-plus round magazine, you’re a criminal. If you load more than seven rounds in your ten round magazine, you’re in violation of the law.”

” Sikhism is a religion born in Punjab, the part of the world where India and Pakistan meet. It’s thousands of square miles that has been at the heart of many conflicts well before it was conquered by Alexander the Great, and many more since then. It is at the center of not just national, but religious crossroads, home to Hindus, Muslims, Jainists, Christians and Buddhists.

Sikhs have been defined as warrior-saints and in many ways maintain a warrior culture to this day; Sikh men and women wear five articles of faith, including the kirpan, an often ornate sword or dagger.

The weapon is not merely symbolic. It may look decorative, but is a physical means to protect yourself, and dharma — the universal law and order that upholds the universe. The belief that you must seek out justice for all mankind is paramount to Sikhs, by any means necessary.”

” Kelly responded that he went into the gun store with a plan to buy a .45, “and if we had the opportunity, to buy the AR-15 as well.” He said he didn’t “know the timing,” but he and his people “had a plan for when [they] were going to announce it on Facebook.”

Attention to this issue has been intense, because Kelly bought the AR-15 on March 5 but did not announce that he was turning it over to Tucson PD until three days later.

During the interview, Kelly criticized the AR-15 as a “deadly” weapon “designed for the military” – one which people can buy too easily. But it is unclear what it proves if Kelly, a man with an apparently immaculate record, does not trigger any red flags in a gun purchase background check.”

” On Saturday, El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa told radio station KVOR that he received an email last week that said Democrats would either stop or stall pay raises for the state’s elected sheriffs if they did not support Colorado’s pending gun control legislation, The Blaze reported Sunday.

“I have not been directly threatened or coerced in any way nor would I tolerate anythreat,” he wrote on Facebook, but added that a message that was delivered verbally to a representative of the Colorado Sheriff’s Association “basically stated that the Senate Dems are very upset with the Colorado Sheriffs opposing the gun legislation proposed by the Senate Democrats.”

Maketa said he was “absolutely outraged by that. Number one, the salary bill for elected officials is a mandate of the legislature. Creating gun control is not a mandate, and in this case, there is no factual basis for it.” ”

” “It would be a monumental mistake on his(Baucus) part” to support federal gun control legislation, Reichner said.

Gun rights carry sway in Montana. The state Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks says Montana “boasts more hunters per capita than any other state in the nation.” State lawmakers have been discussing measures to expand gun rights. And a pro-gun group, the Montana Shooting Sports Association, has set up a website that is updated with Baucus’ public statements on gun policy.

Other Democratic senators that Republicans are watching closely include Mark Begich of Alaska, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Mark Pryor of Arkansas.

Democrats control the Senate, but if Republicans pick off these seats they could take the chamber.

Pryor already has said he won’t support an assault weapons ban, and the measure is unlikely to clear the Senate. Gun activists still worry that other restrictions they oppose are in the works.

“I don’t think the assault rifle ban, the semi-auto ban, has been the real objective,” said Gary Marbut of the Montana Shooting Sports Association. “I think that is where the rubber meets the road, federal gun registration.”